Excerpt: ...as a result of the events at issue in this action. (Ibid.) Defendants do not dispute that Plaintiff is 86 years old. Defendants, however, contend that Plaintiff has not submitted any evidence in support of his claim that his health requires a trial preference. Defendants assert that Plaintiff's counsel's declaration “should be disregarded by the Court as Counsel is not a medical expert.” Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 36.5, howev...

Excerpt: .... (Evid. Code, § 452, subd. (d).) Defendant's Demurrers to the First, Second, Fourth through Eleventh, and Thirteenth through Fifteenth Causes of Action are SUSTAINED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND. The defects in Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint (FAC) identified in the Court's May 23, 2019 Order sustaining Defendant's demurrer to these causes of action with leave to amend have not been cured by the SAC. The SAC is comprised of allegations that are, ...

Excerpt: ...ion 484.090, subdivision (a), a court “shall issue a right to attach order . . . if it finds all of the following: (1) The claim upon which the attachment is based is one upon which an attachment may be issued. (2) The plaintiff has established the probable validity of the claim upon which the attachment is based. (3) The attachment is not sought for a purpose other than recovery on the claim upon which the attachment is based. (4) The amount t...

Excerpt: ...o 10, Defendants. PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, LLC Plaintiff, v. MARJORIE ANUNCIACION, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 19‐CLJ‐07347 [Joined with 18‐CLJ‐06667 and 19‐CLJ‐07387 solely for hearing on these motions] Assigned for All Purposes to Hon. Danny Y. Chou ORDER DENYING PLAINTIFFS' MOTIONS RE INFORMAL DISCOVERY CONFERENCES June 3, 2021 Law and Motion Calendar PAGE 6 Judge: ...

Excerpt: ...1.320, subd. (a) [authorizing motion “If a party filing a response to a demand for inspection . . . thereafter fails to permit the inspection . . . in accordance with that party's statement of compliance”].) Plaintiff seeks an order compelling Defendants to produce “unaltered” documents responsive to Plaintiff's Request for Production of Documents (Set One) (RPD) Nos. 5, 12, 13, 14, and 20. Defendants agreed in their original responses to...

Excerpt: ...ree that FCA is not a signatory to the arbitration agreement – which appears in a sales contract between Plaintiff and the nonparty seller, Putnam Automotive Inc. (Putnam). (Hanson Decl., ex. A.) As a result, FCA bears the burden of establishing standing to enforce that agreement. (Jones v. Jacobson (2011) 195 Cal.App.4th 15.) FCA has not met this burden. First, the express terms of the sales contract do not establish an agreement to arbitrate ...

Excerpt: ... Complaint (Motion) is GRANTED. In the Motion, Defendant seeks summary adjudication of the second through fifth causes of action in Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (PAC) based on the 26th affirmative defense in its Answer to the PAC. That defense alleges that Defendant has a vested right to use the property for its sewer line under Civil Code section 1009, subdivision (d). As explained below, the Court finds that Defendant has met its burden of est...

Excerpt: ...021; (3) Exhibit N and the first page of Exhibit M to Defendant's Motion to Dismiss filed February 23, 2021; (4) Exhibit N and the first page of Exhibit M attached to Defendant's Amended Answer and Amended Motion to Dismiss filed March 10, 2021; and (5) Exhibit B to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaint. Court records are presumed to be open unless confidentiality is required by law. (Cal. Rules of Court (CRC), Rule 2.550(c).) For a record to be fi...

Excerpt: ...rte Application and Ex Parte Application for an Order Shortening Time to Hear Plaintiff's Motion to Enforce Settlement Agremeent.  Page 3, Line 26: dollar amount specified therein. 2. March 11, 2020 Declaration of Matthew Squires in Support of Plaintiff's Ex Parte Application for an Order Shortening Time to Hear Motion to Enforce Settlement Agreement  Page 2, Line 9: Wehmeyer Custom Homes recorded a mechanics' lien on my property for dollar...

Excerpt: ...produce all responsive photographs and videos within 15 days from the date of service of notice of this order. Defendant's request for sanctions against Plaintiff and/or her counsel, Gail Lamchick, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. Plaintiff and/or her counsel is ORDERED to pay Defendant $1,260.00 in sanctions. Plaintiff has demonstrated good cause for the production of the requested documents, as the documents are directly relevant to Plain...

Excerpt: ...Trackman v. Kenney (2010) 187 Cal.App.4th 175, 180.) The default judgment was entered on 4/30/2015, but Defendant did not file this Motion until 12/21/20. Second, Defendant has failed to demonstrate extrinsic fraud. The misidentification of the person accepting substitute service as Defendant's daughter does not defeat service. (See Trackman, supra, 187 Cal.App.4th at pp. 183‐184.) Defendant does not dispute that the address was her home addres...

Excerpt: ...��577551, are GRANTED pursuant to Evidence Code section 452, subdivision (d). Judicial notice is taken of the documents' filing/recording, contents, and legal effect, but not the truth of any statements therein. Defendant demurs on the ground that Plaintiff's Complaint is barred by res judicata. In support, Defendant points to the judgment entered in Makiyama v. Ito, SF Case No. CGC‐19‐577551. But an appeal was taken from that judgment on Feb...

Excerpt: ...EJUDICE. Judgment Creditor indicates that it discovered various “akas” for Judgment Debtor Maher Abudamous (Judgment Debtor) and filed a Declaration of Identity (Declaration) identifying these “akas.” As a threshold matter, however, this Declaration violates Rule 1.201(a)(1) of the California Rules of Court. It is therefore STRICKEN on the Court's own motion. Accordingly, the clerk of the court is ORDERED to remove the Declaration of Iden...

Excerpt: ...ial Notice is GRANTED. (Evid. Code, § 452, subds. (d) & (h).) Both parties refer to the plan documents in their briefs, and Plaintiff California Spine and Neurosurgery Institute (Plaintiff) does not oppose the Request for Judicial Notice. (See StorMedia Inc. v. Superior Court (1999) 20 Cal.4th 449, 457, fn.9.) A. First Cause of Action – Promissory Estoppel Defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings as to Plaintiff's first cause of action...

Excerpt: ...ntered in Case No. 19‐CIV‐06527, it does not appear that Plaintiff may be subject to a prefiling order before being found to be a vexatious litigant. (See Hupp v. Solera Oak Valley Greens Assn. (2017) 12 Cal.App.5th 1300, 1318‐1319 [refusing to dismiss claims filed by nonvexatious litigant even though nonvexatious litigant alleged claims similar to claims alleged by co‐ plaintiff who was a vexatious litigant and was the mother of the vexa...

Excerpt: ...nia Rules of Court – which states that “If the response to a particular discovery request is dependent on the response given to another discovery request, or if the reasons a further response to a particular discovery request is deemed necessary are based on the response to some other discovery request, the other request and the response to it must be set forth . . . .” Regarding Form Interrogatory 17.1, Defendants' Separate Statement does ...

Excerpt: ...habilitation Plan and the individual who verified Petitioner's ex parte conservator application. Respondent also seeks the production of documents covering four topics relating to Petitioner's decision to pursue a conservatorship and Rehabilitation Plan and the grounds for those decision. Finally, Respondent seeks to depose the person most knowledgeable (PMK) of those four topics. Petitioner does not challenge Respondent's right to receive docume...

Excerpt: ... ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No.: 17CIV03847 Assigned For All Purposes to Hon. Danny Y. Chou ORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT Defendant Merz North America's (Merz) Motion for Summary Judgment (Motion) was originally heard by this Court on March 25, 2021 at 2:00 p.m. Craig May and Adam Rapp appeared on behalf of Defendant Merz North America (Merz). Faith Wolinsky appeared on behalf of Defendants Joel Beck, M.D. and Alice Tung. Nobody appeared on behalf ...

Excerpt: ...e unlimited action is pending may stay the unlawful detainer action until the issue of title is resolved in the unlimited action, or it may consolidate the actions.” (Martin‐Bragg v. Moore (2013) 219 Cal.App.4th 367, 385.) Thus, consolidation is permitted but not required. (See id., at p. 393 [“We do not hold that trial courts must in all cases grant applications for consolidation of an unlawful detainer proceeding with a pending quiet titl...

Excerpt: ... for monetary sanctions is DENIED. Defendant's motion to compel responses to its special interrogatories is denied for the same reasons stated in its tentative ruling granting Plaintiff's motion for protective order. In addition, Defendant's motion is untimely as to any interrogatories to which Plaintiff has responded pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.300, subd. (c). Plaintiff served his supplemental responses on October 26, 2020 a...

Excerpt: ...and Procedure (“WPP”) manual from 2018 to the present. Defendant has agreed to produce the 2018 and 2020 manuals subject to a protective order. Accordingly, Plaintiff's motion to compel is GRANTED as to this request. 2. RFP No. 17 Plaintiff's RFP No. 17 seeks documents “including but not limited to electronically stored information and electronic mails, concerning any internal analysis or investigation . . . regarding the TRUNK DEFECT in EX...

Excerpt: ...Plaintiff is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. As a threshold matter, the motion is timely pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure sections 2030.090(a) and 2031.060(a). Defendant Ocean Colony Partners, LLC does not dispute that the Court directed the parties at the September 17, 2020 Informal Discovery Conference (IDC) that the parties coordinate the filing of their respective motions to compel and for protective order so that they could be heard o...

Excerpt: ...election clause such as the one at issue here is generally given effect unless enforcement would be unreasonable or unfair, and the party opposing enforcement of the clause ordinarily bears the burden of proving why it should not be enforced.” (Handoush v. Lease Finance Group (2019) 41 Cal.App.5th 729, 734 (Handoush).) “The burden, however, is reversed when the claims at issue are based on unwaivable rights created by California statutes. In ...

Excerpt: ...s Industry, Inc. (Siemens) and Liberty Mutual Ins. Co. (Liberty Mutual) are ORDERED to conduct a mediation pursuant to their subcontract with McCarthy under the terms set forth below. Pending the completion of the mediation, the crossactions involving Siemens, Liberty Mutual, and McCarthy are STAYED. Siemens' Subcontract with McCarthy requires that Siemens and McCarthy mediate any dispute arising from the Subcontract “before any legal proceedin...

Excerpt: ...ts discretion not to rule on Plaintiff U.S. Bank National Association's (Plaintiff or US Bank) objections to Defendants' evidence, because none of the disputed evidence affects the Court's ruling on the motion. (Code of Civ. Proc. Sect. 437c, subd. (q) [court need rule only on objections deemed material to court's disposition of motion].) Plaintiff's Request for Judicial Notice is GRANTED as to all attached exhibits. B. Defendants' Motion for Sum...